Not abolish, but fulfill?

A prominent Christian belief is that when Jesus says He came to fulfill the Law & the Prophets that meant He lived according to the Law so that those who trusted in Him wouldn't have to. So He kept the Sabbath, observed the festivals, adhered to dietary laws etc and because He did so, we don't have to. We are "under grace" as they say. Does this really make any sense?

How is it grace to be without the instructions that God purposely created, carefully crafted, and obviously deemed important for His people? God created these instructions and taught them to His people who kept falling away from Him even with the instructions. How much moreso without them? And if the Law is abolished that would mean that God descended to earth as Jesus, lived as an obedient Jew, and left His people with . . . what instructions to follow? The 10 commandments? Those are from the Old Testament. Isn't that part of the Law that they say is done away with?

He left good teaching; He was a perfect and sinless example. But we are mere humans who need all the help we can get to move toward sanctification and discovering God's will and following it in the minute details as God leads. Wouldn't it be beneficial then to have that set of instructions that God deemed perfect and which God in His perfection adhered to?

Could it be that Jesus came to live out the Law perfectly and beautifully to show us the blessing, the sanctifying grace to be found in following God's holy instructions? If so, then He came not to abolish but to fulfill, or bring the Law to its fullness by living it. Could it be that He came to stress His instructions, not remove them. Many say the Law is a burden but those instructions are not burdens. Jesus said "For My yoke is easy and My burden is light" (Matthew 11:30). If we view the Law properly and keep it, maybe we will see that the so-called burden of the Law is light (in weight and in brightness of our Spirit: God is light; Jesus, the light of the world), a true blessing.